It was decided that the only schema-expressed enumerations in UBL 2.0
will be for the ATG2-based data types.
There were a number of "system" enumerations in particular datatypes
for in the UBL 1.0 schemas, as compared to trading partners
developing their own "business" enumerations for other data types.
I see a "system" enumeration as one defined by the UBL committee with
a predefined set of values that mean something to the processing
defined by UBL and not really trading-partner specific. If desired,
however, trading partners can change the predefined list (perhaps
only limit a set of status codes that their system supports instead
of a complete set, or augment a set of status codes with an extension
their system supports).
I see a "business" enumeration as one defined entirely by the trading
partners, such as an account code.
One of the action items for 2.0 code lists is to bring the UBL 1.0
system enumerations into the 2.0 fold using the 2.0 methodology of
using genericode files. Therefore, I used Tony's scripts to create
the genericode files from the UBL 1.0 schema expressions, but I
wanted to document what I've done in case something is messed up.
In the table below I used the UBL 1.0 code list schema enumeration
expressions listed on the left to create the UBL 2.0 data type
genericode external enumerations listed on the right.
UBL-CodeList-AcknowledgementResponseCode-1.0 ResponseCodeType
UBL-CodeList-AllowanceChargeReasonCode-1.0 ReasonCodeType
UBL-CodeList-ChannelCode-1.0 ChannelCodeType
UBL-CodeList-ChipCode-1.0 ChipCodeType
UBL-CodeList-CountryIdentificationCode-1.0 (doesn't exist in 2.0?)
UBL-CodeList-DocumentStatusCode-1.0 DocumentStatusCodeType
UBL-CodeList-LatitudeDirectionCode-1.0 LatitudeDirectionCodeType
UBL-CodeList-LineStatusCode-1.0 LineStatusCodeType
UBL-CodeList-LongitudeDirectionCode-1.0 LongitudeDirectionCodeType
UBL-CodeList-OperatorCode-1.0 OperatorCodeType
UBL-CodeList-PaymentMeansCode-1.0 PaymentMeansCodeType
UBL-CodeList-SubstitutionStatusCode-1.0 SubstitutionStatusCodeType
The first question is in regard to the first two entries of the table
because it would appear that the names of the data types have changed
from UBL 1 to UBL 2 ... have I correctly guessed the data types to use?
The second question is that UBL 1 had a country identification code
type and it would appear that UBL 2 does not ... is this an oversight?
Next, to cover up the temporary presence of CurrencyCodeType that I
gather will be removed in the next draft of 2.0, I've copied the
CurrencyCodeContentType list of coded values to be the
CurrencyCodeType list of coded values, rather than using the UBL 1.0
currency list.
Finally, I have not checked (and do not have the subject matter
expertise to check) any of the coded values themselves for their
appropriateness or business semantics, as I am only mechanically
producing the support files from the names of the code lists that I
have. Can someone confirm that the coded values we used for these
data types in UBL 1.0 are the acceptable coded values we are to use
for these data types in UBL 2.0?
Thanks!
. . . . . . . . . . Ken
--
Upcoming XSLT/XSL-FO hands-on courses: Washington,DC 2006-03-13/17
World-wide on-site corporate, govt. & user group XML/XSL training.
G. Ken Holman mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/
Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0 +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995)
Male Cancer Awareness Aug'05 http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/bc
Legal business disclaimers: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal